⬆️ Support Django 3.1

[simkimsia]

ref #179

[simkimsia]

@javrasya Let me know if I'm doing this correctly.

Once I get this working and accepted, I will make two other PRs:

1. Add python 3.7
2. Add python 3.8

I think you set python 3.6 as your default. I'm okay with that just that I want to make sure river is still compatible with 3.7 and 3.8.

The reason is because I hope to close #179

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-81.6%) to 0.0% when pulling e292d9a9fcbbc34bd8ba6d08e0f5d2932b36076b on simkimsia:upgrade-django31 into 57fdcc1926adba86ef8697adb00e6a235a7bdbff on javrasya:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 81.646% when pulling 9c0e4911ab5c93a810bbe07b582a144e9c73ead5 on simkimsia:upgrade-django31 into 57fdcc1926adba86ef8697adb00e6a235a7bdbff on javrasya:master.

[simkimsia]

Coverage decreased (-81.6%) to 0.0% when pulling e292d9a on simkimsia:upgrade-django31 into 57fdcc1 on javrasya:master.

Sorry @javrasya I'm not sure why the coveraged dropped to zero. Can help me decipher this?

[javrasya]

Coverage decreased (-81.6%) to 0.0% when pulling e292d9a on simkimsia:upgrade-django31 into 57fdcc1 on javrasya:master.

Sorry @javrasya I'm not sure why the coveraged dropped to zero. Can help me decipher this?

I don't think it is a big deal. Don't worry about that. Few tests are broken because some error messages on the Django side with the newer version are different compared to the older versions.

[simkimsia]

I have looked. I have a situation where a test passes at 3.0 but fails at 3.1 django

I looked at how Django tests for the assertion message and apparently has teh same setup regardless if it's 3.0 https://github.com/django/django/blob/stable/3.0.x/tests/delete/tests.py#L70 or 3.1 https://github.com/django/django/blob/stable/3.1.x/tests/delete/tests.py#L72

so how do I solve this?

[javrasya]

I have looked. I have a situation where a test passes at 3.0 but fails at 3.1 django

I looked at how Django tests for the assertion message and apparently has teh same setup regardless if it's 3.0 https://github.com/django/django/blob/stable/3.0.x/tests/delete/tests.py#L70 or 3.1 https://github.com/django/django/blob/stable/3.1.x/tests/delete/tests.py#L72

so how do I solve this?

The error message in django v3.1 for delete protection violation is slightly different;

3.0: Cannot delete some instances of model 'Workflow' because they are referenced through <a> protected foreign key 3.1: Cannot delete some instances of model 'Workflow' because they are referenced through protected foreign key<s>

So the message pattern in the tests must be compatible with the change.

https://github.com/javrasya/django-river/blob/master/river/tests/models/test__transition_approval.py#L30 https://github.com/javrasya/django-river/blob/master/river/tests/models/test__transition_approval.py#L48 https://github.com/javrasya/django-river/blob/master/river/tests/models/test__transition_approval.py#L66

According to pychamcrest, the message we pass down to the expectation is a regexp pattern. So we can simply pass the following instead of full message;

        assert_that(
            calling(flow.workflow.delete),
            raises(ProtectedError, "Cannot delete some instances of model 'Workflow' .*")
        )

[simkimsia]

@javrasya thank you

What's your linter by the way?

Mine is black so it changes quite a bit of the formatting

[javrasya]

@javrasya thank you

What's your linter by the way?

Mine is black so it changes quite a bit of the formatting

That is a good question actually. I use PyCharm and my formatter is the one that comes with it out of the box except with a custom line limiter at 160 instead of 120;

[simkimsia]

So will u have any issues that I maintain my current linter?

[javrasya]

So will u have any issues that I maintain my current linter?

The only thing I noticed which I would like you to have is the line limit to be 160. Apart from that, it all looks good.

[simkimsia]

So will u have any issues that I maintain my current linter?

The only thing I noticed which I would like you to have is the line limit to be 160. Apart from that, it all looks good.

I have already done that

But no change for the code apparently

[simkimsia]

oh wait there's a change. I apologize. I will make a force-push to ensure it follows your 160 limit

[simkimsia]

Thank you @javrasya please review this PR and let me know if there's any other changes I need to make to close #179

[javrasya]

Thank you @javrasya please review this PR and let me know if there's any other changes I need to make to close #179

Amazing, I did small touches to make the diff look cleaner in this PR. Let's wait for one final build to pass and then it is time to merge this :-)

[javrasya]

Well done @simkimsia